And again you sympathize with a group of bullies. What is it with the escapist and going head over heels to defend the name of anonymous? Are you part of the collective? Do they have you scared enough that you can tackle the real issues they impose?

Seriously, I'm tired of these lopsided arguments you people keep coming up with to shine them as "the good guys" its sickening. And guess what? if you even listen to the voice of your readers in the forums, you will see they aren't buying it any longer.

I'm assuming you're a Sony fanboy or summat, and hopped on the "blame Anonymous" bandwagon as soon as you could.

It's just a loosely connected group of internet folk. That do stuff. They don't go out of their to be assholes, nor do they try and bully the little guy. When they organized massive protests of Scientology, was that them being evil?

Also, blindly obeying "the voice of the forums" would probably be the single most idiotic thing that any group could ever do. Seriously. We wouldn't have Unskippable, Extra Credits, Zero Punctuation, and so on, because there's always a chunk of people going "you really lost your touch, not entertaining/right at all, stop making these".

Frankly, I applaud them for tackling an actual issue, which is that everyone is scrambling to find a scapegoat for Sony once more taking a crap on its userbase. And this was Sony taking a crap on their userbase, because if they gave even half a damn about them they would have installed some basic security.

Or should we just only have opinions that kiss Sony's ass, chanting that Anonymous is the New Big Evil in the internet world and that we must band together to stop Them? Just because you disagree, doesn't mean everyone else does. I like Anon, I think they didn't do it. You can't get me to disagree with my opinion.

Clipclop:If I wasn't browsing one of the /i/ boards right now, I would actually consider whatever your saying. I am looking right now at a 140 post thread of a group of anons just railing this black guy... and guess for what? for nothing basically the thread consensus is "he's a nigger and does nigger things" Its a lynch mob without ropes. And there is nothing warranted about it, there is nothing to be learned its just bullies being bullies. They already dropped his dox, they already harassing him with racist calls they apparently smacked down his myspace page. For. no. reason.

he's just a guy who they settled on for nothing. Sure is justice in here.

Well that's obviously just a bunch of racist fuckwits. They don't represent Anonymous, or even a fraction of the Anon collective. (Don't forget, anybody with a computer and an internet connection is essentially an anon, and most people these days aren't racist.)

Just to be clear, though, are they railing on him just on the imageboard, or are they actively harassing this poor man through Facebook, email, and whatnot? Because there's a big difference.

When i was 12, doing stupid irresponsible stuff got me punished. I fully agree with what she got. She will think twice next time she decides to dance around the internet swinging middle finger at everyone. why dont you go in a mall and do that?

Oh, and, this was NewFags. not Anon ideals. NewFags. google it.

There is a difference between doing something and getting admonished in public, and doing something in which you are condemned by a group of people that are mostly trying to humiliate you on the net. Once again, I reiterate, she was 12 and being harassed by a group of people that are probably 21 year old basement dwellers that live at their parent's house.

What is your point here? Because she is 12 she is absolved of all responsibilities? That because she is 12 she cannot get pummeled to the ground when she does stupid shit? This girl teased them. They do not seek out people minding their own business. Perhaps i am a bit cruel, but if you play with fire, you get burned. the fire doesnt care if youre 12 or 30. You wanna go on the internet and prance about mocking everything, dont go surprised or offended when people maul you down. The world is cruel, and if you dont know so, its your own befault to what happens to you.

Also, if youre 12, you shouldnt even engage in what she was engaging, IE, mocking people, teasing people older than her, and overall, being a camwhore.

In the end you can complain all you want, a 12 year old got punished, and she will live on her life normally, but aware to not fuck with people anymore.

I dont defend those who attack her, but i defend that she was punished with reason.

So what if she harassed them. They should just get over it. If they feel "threatened" by a stupid girls actions, such as her being a camwhore and mocking people then... so what. I'm not sure if she will live her life normally after this.

And again you sympathize with a group of bullies. What is it with the escapist and going head over heels to defend the name of anonymous? Are you part of the collective? Do they have you scared enough that you can tackle the real issues they impose?

Seriously, I'm tired of these lopsided arguments you people keep coming up with to shine them as "the good guys" its sickening. And guess what? if you even listen to the voice of your readers in the forums, you will see they aren't buying it any longer.

I'm assuming you're a Sony fanboy or summat, and hopped on the "blame Anonymous" bandwagon as soon as you could.

It's just a loosely connected group of internet folk. That do stuff. They don't go out of their to be assholes, nor do they try and bully the little guy. When they organized massive protests of Scientology, was that them being evil?

Also, blindly obeying "the voice of the forums" would probably be the single most idiotic thing that any group could ever do. Seriously. We wouldn't have Unskippable, Extra Credits, Zero Punctuation, and so on, because there's always a chunk of people going "you really lost your touch, not entertaining/right at all, stop making these".

Frankly, I applaud them for tackling an actual issue, which is that everyone is scrambling to find a scapegoat for Sony once more taking a crap on its userbase. And this was Sony taking a crap on their userbase, because if they gave even half a damn about them they would have installed some basic security.

Or should we just only have opinions that kiss Sony's ass, chanting that Anonymous is the New Big Evil in the internet world and that we must band together to stop Them? Just because you disagree, doesn't mean everyone else does. I like Anon, I think they didn't do it. You can't get me to disagree with my opinion.

okay, since you fully went attack mode i'm not even going to bother hard with this post. But I will clear a few things up for you. I've never owned a console system since the snes. i've played a few sony games in passing, but if i'm going to be called a fanboy of anything it is the PC. Which i've been playing games on since the AppleII from yesteryear. Your weird illogical baseless arguments about being butthurt are completely unfounded and wrong.

There is a difference between doing something and getting admonished in public, and doing something in which you are condemned by a group of people that are mostly trying to humiliate you on the net. Once again, I reiterate, she was 12 and being harassed by a group of people that are probably 21 year old basement dwellers that live at their parent's house.

What is your point here? Because she is 12 she is absolved of all responsibilities? That because she is 12 she cannot get pummeled to the ground when she does stupid shit? This girl teased them. They do not seek out people minding their own business. Perhaps i am a bit cruel, but if you play with fire, you get burned. the fire doesnt care if youre 12 or 30. You wanna go on the internet and prance about mocking everything, dont go surprised or offended when people maul you down. The world is cruel, and if you dont know so, its your own befault to what happens to you.

Also, if youre 12, you shouldnt even engage in what she was engaging, IE, mocking people, teasing people older than her, and overall, being a camwhore.

In the end you can complain all you want, a 12 year old got punished, and she will live on her life normally, but aware to not fuck with people anymore.

I dont defend those who attack her, but i defend that she was punished with reason.

actually it does. Their actions are completely unjustifiable. I can go to many a website and see children acting like complete twats, they are CHILDREN. attacking them because they go overboard is utterly inexcusable. adult man jumping down a childs throat because she has a loud mouth is a extremely unnerving and creepy thought. Its outright terrifying.

you fail to see this is the internet, not real life. they didnt ram down her throat and gave her mental scarring or raped her. stop overblowing this. they harrassed her and humiliated her. if she was mature enough to do her idiotic actions, she wuold be mature enough to get the consequences. you try to justify your point by overblowing the consequences of what happened. and guess what, i can go to amany websites and see children get humiliated. hell ive spent a good time reading about troll events where said bully teens got trolled accordingly.

terryfying? you need to get out of your bubble. if this is terryfying, you seriously need to open your eyes. youll get a heart attack when you realize what terryfying really means. this is mildly amusing and somewhat slightly haunting. ive yet to see someone get more than a few mail at home for this. anyone of ourse, who actively stalks a child is wrong, but no such thing happened. they exposed her life, exposed her address and humiliated her in public. no man went up to her and asked her to get in his candy van.

in the end, you defend that children are excusable of punishment for their actions(a reason i despise our society in this day n age), while i defend that a human being, if conscious and aware enough of his actions, should get punished, lightly if so, for said actions.

we offer different points of views, wich arent perfect, and subject to neither wrong or right.

you actively bully, insult, mock and tease people, you get and punished humiliated. doesnt matter she was 12, she was mature enough to do those horrible acts, and she learned not to do them again, at no cost to her sanity, mentality or body. shell live on to be a lil whore in real life.thats my belief. :/ sorry to bust your balls on the whole unified ideal world.

There are still 3-4 reply's that are unanswered and i know alot more will come but simply put i need to go, i've chopped about 7 hours here typing away. I'm hungry, and want to do something else before i go to bed for work in the morning.

I'll get back to it when i get home tomorrow, but i'm freaking cooked right now. I'll keep your responses in my in box.

Chatboy 91:But, let's face it we're arguing on the internet. You're set in your current beliefs, I'm currently set in mine. Let's just agree to disagree and stop wasting each other's time.

I took an oath long ago not to rest while people were making irrational arguments and claiming it was their opinion, and that was all that mattered, because clearly their opinion was worth more than a rational logical argument.

Fair enough, I agree that opinion does not set precedence over logical arguments. I hope I didn't come across that way, I was simply working off of my own knowledge on the issue.

okay, since you fully went attack mode i'm not even going to bother hard with this post. But I will clear a few things up for you. I've never owned a console system since the snes. i've played a few sony games in passing, but if i'm going to be called a fanboy of anything it is the PC. Which i've been playing games on since the AppleII from yesteryear. Your weird illogical baseless arguments about being butthurt are completely unfounded and wrong.

Edit: sorry, I have a DS. Not sure if you count handhelds or not.

Come back with a better argument that isn't based on fallacies.

Nice job of dodging the point because of my opening. My assumption had been that only a fanboy of Sony could possibly be seeing Anonymous as a 100% evil entity.

I was mistaken.

Now, let's reiterate the rest of what I said, but shorter:

Anonymous has done good things in the past. And so far, the only evidence linking their amorphous, unorganized, anarchic group to the Sony attack is a clearly left behind calling card, which defeats the purpose of Anonymous and sets up a nice scape goat.

So, acting like they are bad is just a knee jerk reaction, and precisely what corporations, governments, and religious groups want you to think because of what Anon stands for. Which is generally anarchy, entertainment, and freedom.

Clipclop:[That's just it. There are poeple in this thread going out of there was to insist that they are in fact a "free speech, hacktivist group" and saviors of internet freedom. When anyone with any brain knows they are not.

Well, to be entirely honest one of the reasons why I rant about it, other than being bored, is because Anonymous wasn't quite a household name before the whole "wikileaks" thing. Love it or hate it, that got them t a ton of exposure, and people who weren't paying attention think that this defines the movement. Prior to that their "greatest hits" consisted of things like:

Even the scientology raids, operation titstorm, etc... failed to get the attention that wikileaks did.

The very fact that you could shock people with their memes and virally spread videos like zippocat, tubgirl, funnelgirl, and others was a testement that not many people knew who they were so didn't see it coming. Likewise even people like Oprah who tend to be fairly well informed had no idea in reciting the Anonymous credo and making herself look like a complete moron to anyone who did know.

So I pretty much just take the time to explain things, and hope it sinks in. If people are looking to Anonymous to be some kind of heroes, they have the wrong group. Even their "heroic" defense of Wikileaks is a mixed bag, as only left wing extremists really think that was a good idea, and only because it made people they didn't like look bad at the moment. National security is one of those things that even sane proponents of free speech can get behind, and leaking classified diplomatic documents and such to the general public is not a good thing from anyone's perspective. Sure it made the US look stupid and hurt it's relations a bit, but at the same time just imagine, the US goes down and with it go all those wonderful free speech rights supposedly being championed.

Therumancer: You know that Anonymous is not, and never was a group of white knights, right?

You know that "white knights" used to be a Klan rank or an epithet for their members?

Sorry, it's not that I don't disagree with you, it's just, in context, alternately either very clever or... something.

There was no paticular dual meaning intended. I meant white knight in the context of the stereotypical character that appears out of nowhere to rescue the damsel or save the day from great evil. The point was that Anonymous is not exactly a group of heroes that crusade for the common good, Anonymous is just as likely to say terrorize the damsel and ruin her life just for some good lines to virally spread through the internet as memes as they are to protect her in my experience.

Anonymous is just not consistant enough, by it's very nature to stand for anything. Even if you look at their persecution of those who hurt cats, which many people believe has been consistant, the observant can point to the whole "Zippocat" thing which was a set of step by step "instructional" pictures for lighting a cat on fire, complete with a charred corpse finish. A copypasta used to troll animal rights activists and such, that became associated with the group fairly early on.

okay, since you fully went attack mode i'm not even going to bother hard with this post. But I will clear a few things up for you. I've never owned a console system since the snes. i've played a few sony games in passing, but if i'm going to be called a fanboy of anything it is the PC. Which i've been playing games on since the AppleII from yesteryear. Your weird illogical baseless arguments about being butthurt are completely unfounded and wrong.

Edit: sorry, I have a DS. Not sure if you count handhelds or not.

Come back with a better argument that isn't based on fallacies.

Nice job of dodging the point because of my opening. My assumption had been that only a fanboy of Sony could possibly be seeing Anonymous as a 100% evil entity.

I was mistaken.

Now, let's reiterate the rest of what I said, but shorter:

Anonymous has done good things in the past. And so far, the only evidence linking their amorphous, unorganized, anarchic group to the Sony attack is a clearly left behind calling card, which defeats the purpose of Anonymous and sets up a nice scape goat.

So, acting like they are bad is just a knee jerk reaction, and precisely what corporations, governments, and religious groups want you to think because of what Anon stands for. Which is generally anarchy, entertainment, and freedom.

I don't want to get involved in your fight mainly because well, fuck any fight over the internet is stupid. But opening your counter-argument with an assumption and an insult rolled into one has proven to be ineffectual. No one listens when a child is shouting they just want to shut it up. Just because you can't stop your emotions from reaching your fingers doesn't mean you get to insult everyone who has some self-control.

7777777777444:Fine. Fine, Fine, FINE! Have it your way. It just seems that ALMOST everyone agrees... Except you. Perhaps, if you didn't want the so called "hate speech" you might want to consider at least trying to consider OUR side of the story before blaitantly saying "THEY'RE [Insert Derogitory Phrase Here]!"

I admit here and now (as if i actually have to at this point) I hate anonymous. Completely and utterly. I think they are a collection of terrible poeple with insane every changing ideals, i think they are responsible for there splinter groups because they themselves created them. I have a absolute 10 mile high hate boner for anons. And i swing here in your faces.

They probably do more good that I've ever heard of but thats only because i can't hear it over all the bad they do as well. I'm sure the actual group only a tiny percentage actually engage in any of the criminal or hurtful acts. But i don't believe that just "voids" you from responsibility or acknowledgement.

Well.... that kinda does void the individuals that don't do anything bad. Anon is a pretty amorphous mass of people, its kinda like pointing at a group of people in an elevator when someone farts and saying "All of you farted". Its kinda pointless to point blame at Anon because well..... they're anon. Nothing you personally can do will bring them down, if anything you'll just invite trouble on yourself. I personally could give two shits towards anon. I agree with some things they stand for and sometimes I'm kinda like eh..... little too far fellas. Best thing you can do against anon if you don't like them is simply avoid them. Do your thing and let them do theirs. All is well.

I don't want to get involved in your fight mainly because well, fuck any fight over the internet is stupid. But opening your counter-argument with an assumption and an insult rolled into one has proven to be ineffectual. No one listens when a child is shouting they just want to shut it up. Just because you can't stop your emotions from reaching your fingers doesn't mean you get to insult everyone who has some self-control.

You owe this guy an apology not a veiled insult

Arguing that I'm being ineffectual by first claiming the entire thing to be stupid, and then comparing me to an angry child that can't control my emotions doesn't really bring your point home too well. You know. Since you kind of did the same thing.

The dude wasn't using polite words to convey his feelings, and I don't really see the point in having to apologize for my statement. Actually, I did apologize, but I'm guessing you inserted an emotion into my emotionless text. Either that or I literally need to say "I am sorry". Which is silly within itself.

The overarching point being that he used polarized wording of his description of Anon, I countered it, and his response was that I had made an assumption. Totally ignored the rest of what I said. I apologized and reiterated the rest of what I said in a more direct way, never got a reply.

EDIT: See the quoted text from the guy in the above post. He has an incredibly polarized, negative look on Anon. Don't see you going after him.

And again you sympathize with a group of bullies. What is it with the escapist and going head over heels to defend the name of anonymous? Are you part of the collective? Do they have you scared enough that you can tackle the real issues they impose?

Seriously, I'm tired of these lopsided arguments you people keep coming up with to shine them as "the good guys" its sickening. And guess what? if you even listen to the voice of your readers in the forums, you will see they aren't buying it any longer.

Clearly you don't realise that not every anon is a dick. That's the whole nature of anon. Some are good. Some are bad. United for a common cause for as long as they're needed and then they move on.

The one making lopsided arguments here is you. Scared? Part of the collective? What do you think the escapist is made up of exactly?

please everybody, enjoy these boards. They attack everything from a school{not fucking kidding, check the first link}, to myspace users, facebook users, hacking random poeple and anything vile you can possibly think of. This doesn't even touch on the racism and homophobia happening with almost every post. Most of these attacks are completely unwarranted. You will find that these "great acts of kindness and safeguarding our liberties" are strangely in the minority here. gee I wonder why... Oh wait, thats because they are BULLIES.

of course these aren't bullies. they are doing it for free speech. They are doing it for human rights and for US.

Right, because the idiots on those boards actually have any true affiliation with Anonymous.

of course they do and you know it. Hell they recite the "pledge" a thousand times across the boards. They aren't even a splinter group, just anons, you admitting to it or not is rather moot to the obvoius. They make no attempt to separate themselves from the collective and anyone at any time can jump in and out and claim they are or not anonymous based on either they think the raid is worthwhile.

This is the part of anonymous they don't want you to see.

Now, where to begin....

We are AnonymousWe do not forgiveWe do not forgetExpect us

Now, I have a name attached to my account.Searching my online handle on Google (if you know what you're doing) will eventually lead to other accounts across the internet I have with the same name.Eventually this WILL lead back to information about me, because I have not made much of an attempt to hide myself.

Am I still Anonymous? I just quoted their mantra. I also go on the *chan's, read anonops, etc. Does this make me Anonymous?

No, as I am not anonymous here. I can be traced back to a person, with just a little ingenuity. However, if I had a different handle here that couldn't be traced back to me (without using much more complex means that would knowledge that would allow you access to my IP address through the forum, etc etc etc) I would be anonymous, and therefore technically part of "Anonymous".

Anonymous is many things, and it's funny because everyone who's arguing about what Anonymous is, has provided some little bit of insight on it.

Anonymous is everyone on the internet who wishes to remain anonymous. This includes the many instances of /b/, Newfags and Oldfags alike (until their anonymity is stripped, of course).

This also includes the hacktivist groups who do their best to try to do GOOD, using the name of Anonymous (this will include a core group who do heavy lifting, while posting information and getting a cloud of followers to join them), they also use Anonymous as a cloud to hide their activities, while bolstering their numbers and anonymity. They will take on whatever cause they feel is just, and are also the ones who are at the forefront of the protection of a free internet. They are also the ones who will deny being a part of activities that go against their ideals.

This also includes the skilled hackers who do shit "For the Lulz", or because they hate something or someone. They will recruit (generally the same methods as the hacktivists) for some schemes, or stick to their core groups (if they have a core group, many are lonewolves), depending on what they need/want to accomplish. They don't give a shit whether or not anyone knows who they are/what they did. They'll do it, and take profit from it if they can. (Note: There IS a currency that is fairly anonymous and easy to transfer, Bitcoin) They'll let people wonder if it was "Anonymous", and rightly so. As they are another face of what has become "Anonymous".

The problem is that people decided that being "Anonymous" meant being part of a specific collective, rather than the natural state of being on the internet. And this is interesting because now hacker groups that used to pick a specific name for themselves now have a blanket group to fall under that will spread suspicion over an incredibly wide userbase, if no other easily identifiable evidence is found. While it means they won't take credit for it the way they would if they had an easily identifiable name, such as our friends the Lulz Boat, it gives them a lot more security. This is why I find that people claiming "Anonymous are a bunch of attention seeking man-children" to be such a preposterous notion. The mask is too broad, and everyone who has spent any time within the 'collective' of anonymous, and considered themselves a part of it, knows this.

Being anonymous should be the state of BEING on the internet. I honestly believe that a lot of this "Anonymous" stuff has come from EVERYWHERE on the internet requiring a login name, with most places making it 'against the rules' to have more than one account. And of course, the appearance of social networking on the internet. While I knew it was going to happen some day, I didn't expect it to change the rules the way it did. It started the push for internet anonymity to be quashed. I see people here on the Escapist pushing for anonymity to end so that people can be held accountable for what they say and do on the internet. THAT sickens me, to be honest. The internet is one of the last places where you can say what you REALLY feel without backlash, if you know what you're doing of course. Problem is, everyone's decided that they WANT the internet to change so that they can feel safe and cozy on it. And honestly, this is WRONG. You will never be completely safe on the internet. Someone with knowledge will always prey on those who don't know, or those who don't at least moderately protect themselves. The first thing most parents say to their children who go on the internet is "Don't tell anyone who you are, how old you are, or where you're from", and they should follow this example themselves. And yet, you go on Facebook and see people making Facebook pages for their children.

What is going to happen within the next couple of years will determine whether we can truly stay safely anonymous on the internet, or whether we all have to register our Government Issued Photo ID with our ISP to get a IPv6(or a newly defined protocol) IP address that will allow us access to the internet.

Anon suffers from the very reason it has rarely been caught, the fact that everyone is anonymous. They can't be stopped permanently because they have no set leadership (though they have prominent figures who host their meeting grounds and build their software that, if targeted, could bring down the network) also there is no accountability for what they do because there is no set leadership to make others actually follow Anon "ideals" and punish those who do not. Though there is much tout about "newfags" and what have you, they are as much a part of Anonymous as any other member due to its nature. As much as they want to claim that the "bad apples" do not represent the group as a whole it does show what kind of operations can exist under the protection of their swarm. This is why I think Anonymous is incompetent. Note: not evil just incompetent, but just as much if not more harm can come from incompetency as evil. If you give someone a good place to plan and organize an assault, don't act innocent when the counter-strike comes. They have given shelter to those who seek to cause nothing but harm in today's world as much as they have given shelter for those who seek freedom of speech. So when Anonymous meets its eventual end, for all things will eventually end, no one can blame the hand that makes the killing blow.

Also I see a lot of people linking this hate against Anonymous as coming from "newfags" or Sony fanboys. Not so, since many people have been in internet communities that have been assaulted by Anonymous. The backlash of their many actions be they for good, evil, or "lulz" does build resentment and that is something they will have to just deal with.

If you want to hate someone, start with Andrew Wakefield. 50+ deaths every year since 2006, and counting.

Gods, do I. I recently found out he lives in Austin, TX now. I *used* to live in Austin. I wish I had known at the time, so I could have adjusted my route home to throw rotten fruit at his place every damn day.

Honestly. I have an autistic child, and I despise the man. He's done more to set Autism research back than any other human alive, as people spend millions of dollars and countless hours disputing and discussing his random ass baseless study.

Imagine the police drag you in and explain that they want the names of all of the people in your organization.

I have to take the opportunity to post this video. The TL;DW is talking to cops under any circumstance is a bad idea. The only words you should say are "am I free to go?" and if the answer is no then the only proper response is "I would like to speak to an attorney"

*sigh* Growing tired of hearing about anon. Seriously, theyre soooo last year :D

On a more serious note, Ive never seen anon as dangerous or been afraid of em, but Ive always been "vary" not to directly offend em, seeing how they target single people for that exact reason.

Shamus makes a good point comparing em with protesters: Go up to a protester and directly insult him, and he will punch you in the face together with all his friends. It doesnt mean the protesters cause is "wrong", just because they on a personal level might be dicks :D

Anon need, imo, to define themselves better during "attacks" so we dont get these imposters. With the currently vague definition of a member, anon is virtually behind most hacking "crimes". They need to take responsibility before or hours after an attack, not wait for the outcome.

They can still be anonymous, but at least have some "leaders" that leads "attacks" (followed by the script-kiddo-minions), and announce it together with the "leader" the moment they attack. If a major incident isnt them, they gotta be quick to go out and say "this isnt us" BEFORE they either get a good or bad response. Currently, everything that gets good responses, they back up, and all that gets bad press is dismissed (almost always after 2-3 weeks when the impact and response has been evaluated).

As for the impact anon got on the world, I dont see em as a bigger nuisance than other "militant" groups like greenpeace, peta and such (NOT comparing anon with these, just their level of impact on the world. WHEW! Dodged that bullet!) :D

This is a topic well worth discussing, perhaps even in a thread on it's own.

Do we want anonymity on the Internet, or accountability?

Complete anonymity allows for people to spout their strongest feelings for or against anything without repercussions. There are no societal pressures to counteract how you feel or to regulate what you say. This allows for the discussion of controversial thoughts and topics without the feeling that someone will punish you.

Of course, there are problems with such freedoms, as demonstrated by forums and threads such as /b/. (Note: I don't go on 4chan, although my friends have shown some of the threads to me in the past. I apologize in advance for any false statements.)

To counteract the chaos created by anonymity, accountability leaked in, assigning people a username or at least making note of an IP address, which could be used by moderators to enforce rules. True anonymity is lost at this point, and some societal pressure returns through authority figures.

With the advent of social networking and linking to profiles, it is easy for a person to surrender their anonymity to anyone who wishes to do a bit of research, allowing for more personal rebuttals and attacks than were previously possible.

Now one can purposefully create an "anonymous" account, but I'm uncertain as to what percentage do so. I imagine it's pretty low.

To level the playing field, should every person be held accountable to their actions on the Internet the same as they would in reality? Or should it be anarchy, where accountability flies out the window, and it falls to the individual to govern themselves? Is there a compromise that can be reached between the two?

*Going a little off topic here*

Freedom of speech is not as well defined as I would like it to be. You may hold the idea that you can speak out for anything, but as soon as you launch in to hate speech or symbols, you have to deal with harassment laws or worse. (Again, rather ignorant of this topic, anyone who can clarify has my gratitude.)

Freedom of speech only seems to apply as long as there isn't a strong enough opposition, and it has its place in everyday life.

Clipclop:Gonna make this as simple as possible for you. Its a 12 year old acting stupid online. a bunch of mostly 21+ year olds completely wrecked her shit in the HUNDREDS. NOTHING she could have done would warrant this.

Nothing. And guess what? if they had come out from behind their keyboards, instead of being completely slimy poeple dispensing "justice" from hundreds of miles away. They would have all been arrested and put into INTENSIVE THERAPY for harassing in mass a 12 year old girl because she "deserved it"

This is not the way functioning humans adults are supposed to work. This is SICKENING.

Neither should a 12 yo girl function that way.It's her retarded kind that invented the kiddy cyber bullying.Running around fb posting shit on slightly chubby children further ruining their self esteem.You probably don't even know about that problem around the internet and it's not for the lulz or spawned from 4chan/anonymous.

PS:She did deserve it.And I lold when I saw it.

PSS:Thanks for making it simple.Totally reminded me of the whole ordeal and got me cheered up.

No 12 year old deserves that! She's 12 for Christ sakes! When you were 12 did you ever say anything relatively intelligent?

I didn't go around bullying anyone.Although I could've since it was the age when people shared a lot of things over the internet.

Thanks for calling my ideology stupid.We can totally clash and measure their IQ.The girl claimed she was 16.Trying to troll,saying she has tits etc.Tits or gtfo is a rule of the internet.She could have always hidden for a while.Apologised.Simple actions that any 12 yo would know.I know I did that age.

I'd rather not have some industry clown speak his mind with something rather offensive because he thinks he's untouchable.

Justin Bieber is already a laughing stock.That said people don't just attack him out of spite.There was also the case where he put a guy's phone number on twitter and told his fans he was a troll.Effectively bullying the kid.But you know best right.

Clipclop:anybody who has been online for a single day could tell you this.

This is a complete non-argument. You haven't said anything here, apart from "people aren't harmless".

Clipclop:last of all, your side is just, if not more biased than mine. How many poeple so far said that girl deserved it? How many have had a completely callous and cavalier attitude towards anons doings?

My side so far is just that you have not in any way made a case for your point. I have nowhere said I support anonymous. I have not made any statement on the girl-story (which I don't know the details of anyway). Attacking me for a point of view I don't have is a bit of a fail.

Mhm, are you talking about those lovely people on 4chans /b category (aka the anus of the internet)?I don't think they deserve any sympathy nor does their craft deserve the sort of romantization it gets here.

The thing about Anonymous is they also like to combine their anonymity with the other famous internet equation and pretend to be idiots. At least with protesters, there is a chance for dialogue and discussion. Not only do Anonymous delight in choosing silly ideas it's much hard to get a grip on convincing them out of it.

But I do think they do normally manage to keep it within decent protesting limits. And as they "said" (and it is very hard for anonymous to actually say anything, which makes the dialogue part a little worse) just before the PSN crash, messing up with things like the PSN isn't cool and that's the sort of thing that goes too far.

Saying that anonymous were fine with trying to post the CEO's family contact details online, which is far less cool

Starke:Right, because that was the problem for the girl Anonymous went after a couple years ago, she was being an "asshole" by not taking off her shirt when they told her to. Right.

Are you talking about Jessi Slaughter? Because you're very uninformed on that front...Her parents were slacking off at being parents. Someone had to teach her a lesson. She would up getting it the hard way.

The important difference is that protesters want something. If you reason with protesters they go away.

Anonymous are like loud, occasionally violent and casually destructive protesters that are protesting for the joy of the protest rather than for a goal. Them not having a goal beyond causing trouble means that you can never get them to go away, they leave when they want to leave.